← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/21298/2022granted

Mohana Suriya v. State Rep By

2022-09-13Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.09.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.OP.No.21298 of 2022 Mohana Suriya ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Kamanaickenpalayam Police Station, Tiruppur District.

Crime No.103 of 2022 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in Crime No.103 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police (in C.C.No.133 of 2022 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Palladam).

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Manoharan For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/6

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.07.2022 for the offences punishable under Section 392 of IPC, in Crime No.103 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had come in a motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 38 CR 9589 along with another person and had snatched 1⁄2 sovereign chain of the defacto complainant and escaped from the scene of occurrence. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was falsely implicated in this case registered by a Palladam Police Station and thereafter, while he was in illegal custody, another case came to be registered by the present respondent viz., The Inspector of Police, Kamanaickenpalayam Police Station, Tiruppur District. He would also submit that the petitioner is aged about 20 years and that while he had come for a job to Tiruppur, he has been fixed in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is prepared to furnish blood sureties and ready to comply 2/6

with any conditions that may be imposed on him. He would further state that the investigation has been completed and the final report has also been filed in C.C.No.133 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palladam. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner had come in a motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 38 CR 9589 along with another person and had snatched 1⁄2 sovereign chain of the defacto complainant and escaped from the scene of occurrence. Therefore, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both the learned counsel and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel and the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner and other than these two cases, no 3/6

other case is pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two sureties, out of which, one should be either the father or the mother of the petitioner, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palladam and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall appear before the Judicial Magistrate, Palladam on all working days at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, 4/6

the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

13.09.2022 rgi To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Palladam.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kamanaickenpalayam Police Station, Tiruppur District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA., J.

rgi 13.09.2022 6/6